Error
  • JUser::_load: Unable to load user with id: 67

Featured Articles

Intel releases tiny 3G cell modem

Intel releases tiny 3G cell modem

Intel has released a 3G cellular modem with an integrated power amplifier that fits into a 300 mm2 footprint, claiming it…

More...
Braswell 14nm Atom slips to Q2 15

Braswell 14nm Atom slips to Q2 15

It's not all rosy in the house of Intel. It seems that upcoming Atom out-of-order cores might be giving this semiconductor…

More...
TSMC 16nm wafers coming in Q1 2015

TSMC 16nm wafers coming in Q1 2015

TSMC will start producing 16nm wafers in the first quarter of 2015. Sometime in the second quarter production should ramp up…

More...
Skylake-S LGA is 35W to 95W TDP part

Skylake-S LGA is 35W to 95W TDP part

Skylake-S is the ‘tock’ of the Haswell architecture and despite being delayed from the original plan, this desktop part is scheduled…

More...
Aerocool Dead Silence reviewed

Aerocool Dead Silence reviewed

Aerocool is well known for its gamer cases with aggressive styling. However, the Dead Silence chassis offers consumers a new choice,…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Tuesday, 20 March 2007 17:08

Blades drawn between IBM and HP

Written by
Image

IBM counter strikes


IBM has attacked HP over claims that its blade servers ran colder than those made by Big Blue.

 
HP released laboratory-based research which it claimed its BladeSystem c-Class used up to 27 per cent less power than the IBM BladeCenter-H in similar configurations.

 
However today IBM said that HP's report made the dubious claim that IBM's use of expansion boards for additional memory cost too much and the HP BladeSystem with ProLiant BL460c significantly outperforms the IBM BladeCenter-H with HS21.

 
An IBM spokesman said that the IBM configuration gave clients greater flexibility and functionality, however it is not likely that a client would be running both.

 
Fewer than 10 per cent of its customers use these expansion options and very few would choose both, making the test unrealistic and not at all real-world, as HP claimed, said IBM.

 
It added that HP’s results were otherwise only showing them as having a 27 percent advantage on this configuration, that validates IBM testing stating IBM is up to 24 percent more energy efficient than HP.

 
It added that the test did not use up to date products in its testing and that "If HP had tested BladeCenter with the current code, IBM is confident it would have resulted in clear IBM leadership in power efficiency per blade."

 

More at Techworld, here.


 

Last modified on Tuesday, 20 March 2007 14:20
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments